It's odd that the question was even asked. Of course you don't rush the court after Purdue.

I still don't see why people get so annoyed by fans rushing the court in a big win. Illinois beat the #1 ranked team on a last second shot. If fans shouldn't rush the court in that situation, when can they? What's the big deal? Fans are enjoying themselves and they're very passionate and excited. The NBA wishes they had that kind of fan excitement.

It's odd that the question was even asked. Of course you don't rush the court after Purdue.

I still don't see why people get so annoyed by fans rushing the court in a big win. Illinois beat the #1 ranked team on a last second shot. If fans shouldn't rush the court in that situation, when can they? What's the big deal? Fans are enjoying themselves and they're very passionate and excited. The NBA wishes they had that kind of fan excitement.

Especially when we beat the #1 team on a buzzer beater. Its in the moment true excitement. Now if we were up all game or won by 7 or 8 then I can understand people griping.

Obviously you dont do it against Purdue, they arent that good. But in big games ala Indiana, I agree WHO CARES?

Maybe next year Krush should have a mandatory court storm after every win. Let it be a sarcastic demonstration of how ridiculous it is that grown men debate the actions of charged up (intoxicated) 20 year olds.

Obviously, I think that is a horrible idea but I bet it would get us some press.

Maybe next year Krush should have a mandatory court storm after every win. Let it be a sarcastic demonstration of how ridiculous it is that grown men debate the actions of charged up (intoxicated) 20 year olds.

Obviously, I think that is a horrible idea but I bet it would get us some press.

I'd like to see a Zombie storming of the court, which would be less "storming" and more unrhythmic shuffling. I think the pace would well emphasize the implied sarcasm.

What has Loren Tate been drinking latelly? The guy keeps making gaffes left and right. The News Gazette got to be getting tired of the bad press.

He led off the article with a rhetorical question and then proceeded to talk about Cowherd's comments. He never once tries to justify rushing after Purdue. Sure, he could have started with "When is it all right to rush the court?" Instead, he gave a real life scenario to enter the discussion.

I suppose I have my problems with Tate. But some of the criticisms are just so ridiculous. This wasn't a gaffe. It was writing.

This! I am normally an "act like you have been there" type guy, but the storming of the court against Indiana was about as deserving a court storming as there is.

Agreed. I think it is nearly always tired and silly looking. That said, if you could draw up the ideal situation where it was totally warranted "Beating your nemesis on a buzzer beater when they are #1" is pretty much it.

__________________"Ron Matt Swanson Coldagelli - You are the funny version of GroundHogday." - krupalija chukwudebe

Tate was being tongue-in-cheek with Cowherd's comments. Cowherd says they shouldn't storm the court because it admits that they are/were better than you. Well, from a logic standpoint, that means you SHOULD rush the court for teams that are clearly better than you, and Purdue has been the last few years since they've won 8 straight.

Clearly, Cowherd is saying he doesn't like court-rushing at all, but his logic in supporting that argument left him open to some hits, I think.

__________________Hype is a self-serving beast that feeds on the hopes and dreams of fans.